View to Washington: Blue Dog Effect

Conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats have undercut progressive Dems on health care reform, but how are they affecting the push for LGBT equality?

BY Kerry Eleveld

August 03 2009 12:00 AM ET

To be honest, none of this struck me as particularly surprising -- I suspected that a healthy majority of Blue Dogs might have voted pro-LGBT on hate crimes, and that of those who didn't, the vast majority would likely represent the South.

But it does demonstrate another point for those who are specifically interested in pushing LGBT rights forward -- swelling the Democratic majorities by electing more Heath Shulers in the South does little to advance LGBT equality. The community would be better served, in fact, by letting Democrats lose some of those Southern seats while focusing on electing some pro-LGBT Republicans in the Midwest and Northeast. In fact, that would be particularly helpful in the Senate. The only caveat is that the movement certainly has an interest in keeping Democrats in the majority.

I devoted my column last week to highlighting the candidacy of New York state assemblywoman Dierdre Scozzafava -- a pro-marriage equality Republican running for Congress. Her race could serve as an interesting test case for the LGBT community depending on who runs against her. Will the community back the Democrat even if he or she can't match Scozzafava's record on LGBT issues, or will LGBT leaders and donors put their full weight behind a candidate who put her seat on the line to vote her conscience on marriage?